• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama to pick Sotomayer for Supreme Court



The article cited claims the test administered in New Haven was "race neutral". The core of the argument is that the test was not race neutral but was in fact discriminatory. An attempt was made to "restart the game" by erasing the results of the test, but that was not satisfactory to the firefighters who scored highest on the test.

No one is demeaning firefighters here, but if the test was written to favor white applicants, then it should be changed. History is full of examples of seemingly innocuous regulations which were designed to discriminate against a group. If these firefighters are indeed the most qualified for advancement, they should have no trouble passing another test. To argue this case to the Supreme Court seems petty and small-minded.
 
The article cited claims the test administered in New Haven was "race neutral". The core of the argument is that the test was not race neutral but was in fact discriminatory. An attempt was made to "restart the game" by erasing the results of the test, but that was not satisfactory to the firefighters who scored highest on the test.

No one is demeaning firefighters here, but if the test was written to favor white applicants, then it should be changed. History is full of examples of seemingly innocuous regulations which were designed to discriminate against a group. If these firefighters are indeed the most qualified for advancement, they should have no trouble passing another test. To argue this case to the Supreme Court seems petty and small-minded.
The fact that one racial group performs better on a test is not enough to show that the test was designed to discriminate. Sometimes some groups really just do outperform other groups.
 
The fact that one racial group performs better on a test is not enough to show that the test was designed to discriminate. Sometimes some groups really just do outperform other groups.

As I understand the argument(and I am not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt), the rules in place where that the tests had to be race neutral. Since the result of the test suggest that it was not race neutral(ie, whites did better), the results had to be thrown out. I think this is one of those cases where what is right is going to be subservient to the law as written. If the law is written that results indicate whether a test is race neutral or not, then this case ends with justice for no one.
 
The fact that one racial group performs better on a test is not enough to show that the test was designed to discriminate. Sometimes some groups really just do outperform other groups.

Actually no, they don't. This was a test for firemen, not for nuclear physicists. If the results are slanted toward white candidates there is a good chance the test was designed to achieve those results. That is a disparate impact. By nullifying the results of the test, New Haven sought to make a neutral decision...to start over, giving everyone a fair chance.
 
Racism is whats its called. Doesn't matter what lame ass excuses you all make up or what Obama tells you to say. Its Racism.

Utterly asinine to not promote people who passed qualifications because others didn't. To do so based on the color of their skins=Racism.
 
Racism is whats its called. Doesn't matter what lame ass excuses you all make up or what Obama tells you to say. Its Racism.

Utterly asinine to not promote people who passed qualifications because others didn't. To do so based on the color of their skins=Racism.

The question for a judge is what the law reads. We do not want "activist judges" who make the law themselves do we?
 
The article cited claims the test administered in New Haven was "race neutral". The core of the argument is that the test was not race neutral but was in fact discriminatory. An attempt was made to "restart the game" by erasing the results of the test, but that was not satisfactory to the firefighters who scored highest on the test.

No one is demeaning firefighters here, but if the test was written to favor white applicants, then it should be changed. History is full of examples of seemingly innocuous regulations which were designed to discriminate against a group. If these firefighters are indeed the most qualified for advancement, they should have no trouble passing another test. To argue this case to the Supreme Court seems petty and small-minded.




How was a test written to "favor white firefighters"... :lol: that's one of the dumbest things I have seen on DP. That a firefighting test would favor one race over another... :lol:
 
As I understand the argument(and I am not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt), the rules in place where that the tests had to be race neutral. Since the result of the test suggest that it was not race neutral(ie, whites did better), the results had to be thrown out. I think this is one of those cases where what is right is going to be subservient to the law as written. If the law is written that results indicate whether a test is race neutral or not, then this case ends with justice for no one.

It's a test for fire fighters. How could it possibly not have been race neutral? Gimme a break.
 
The question for a judge is what the law reads. We do not want "activist judges" who make the law themselves do we?

I'd like text of the law that says if one group outperforms another in the results then the test should be trashed for the racist toilet paper it is.
 
How was a test written to "favor white firefighters"... :lol: that's one of the dumbest things I have seen on DP. That a firefighting test would favor one race over another... :lol:

Again, this is as I understand it, and I may be mistaken(though I don't think I am).

The way the law is written, whether the test is race neutral is determined by the result, ie if blacks do not do well on the test, the law says it is not race neutral.

The whole case is stupid. I worry that no one is going to get what they should, and justice is not going to be served. I just am not sure that this is Sotomayer's fault.
 
It's a test for fire fighters. How could it possibly not have been race neutral? Gimme a break.

You are arguing against something I am not saying. I don't even like the idea of having to worry about race in a job test. The test should be based on the job, not on race.
 
It's a test for fire fighters. How could it possibly not have been race neutral? Gimme a break.

I cannot find specific examples from the New Haven test but, if a firefighter test asked for the chemical breakdown of a specific type of plastic, that answer would favor applicants with an education in college level chemistry, which might favor white applicants.
Tests can be devised to weed out minorities, it's a remnant of Jim Crow that still exists.
 
I cannot find specific examples from the New Haven test but, if a firefighter test asked for the chemical breakdown of a specific type of plastic, that answer would favor applicants with an education in college level chemistry, which might favor white applicants.
Tests can be devised to weed out minorities, it's a remnant of Jim Crow that still exists.

You study for the fire fighter exam. It's part book - which you study for and part PT- which you train for.

There is nothing on the test that isn't garnered from studying the training manual. If they don't read the book or don't retain the info that's not a racist issue.
 
There is nothing on the test that isn't garnered from studying the training manual. If they don't read the book or don't retain the info that's not a racist issue.

How can you know that all the material in the New Haven test was in the training manual? Please link to your confirmation.
 
How can you know that all the material in the New Haven test was in the training manual? Please link to your confirmation.

Because that's how it normally is. They do have study guides. Why don't you link to the specifics that were both racial and not in the study guides? Surely Sotomayer must have highlighted them in her decision? oops. No she didn't.
 
Although the parties dispute the exact racial breakdown of
candidates passing the Captain’s test,7 plaintiffs do not dispute
that the results showed a racially adverse impact on African-
American candidates for both the Lieutenant and Captain
positions, as judged by the EEOC Guidelines. Pl. L.R. 56 Stmt. ¶
246; Def. L.R. 56 Stmt. ¶ 246. Thus, it is necessarily
undisputed that, had minority firefighters challenged the results
of the examinations, the City would have been in a position of
defending tests that, under applicable Guidelines, presumptively
had a disparate racial impact.

I am still reading...or, I will be in a bit, this is incredibly dry reading, I need a break.

This quote I do find interesting. It is from the document from the original court ruling. As I read through this, I am more and more convinced the problem is with the law, not with the ruling.
 
Because that's how it normally is. They do have study guides. Why don't you link to the specifics that were both racial and not in the study guides? Surely Sotomayer must have highlighted them in her decision? oops. No she didn't.

Just link to confirmation that the test was taken from the study guide. I can't find that, though it would make sense.
 
I am still reading...or, I will be in a bit, this is incredibly dry reading, I need a break.

This quote I do find interesting. It is from the document from the original court ruling. As I read through this, I am more and more convinced the problem is with the law, not with the ruling.

Well please link the law too so we can judge whether it was a wild interpretation and over reach of said law or if the ruling merely upheld the law.
 
Well please link the law too so we can judge whether it was a wild interpretation and over reach of said law or if the ruling merely upheld the law.

Patients and stuff, I am not that fast a reader. Also, have not actually seen a link yet to the law, but will keep eye open and link it along if I find it. Taking a break and making dinner now though, so gunna be awhile. Feel free to give a hand, I used Rev Hellhound's link as a starting place.

Edited to add: oh, and it will be multiple laws, the firefighters filed based on a number of things, including suing for emotional distress.
 
Last edited:
I have found a site that purports to have actual examples of the types of questions found on the New Haven firefighter test. As you will see, they have no relation to firefighting, but could be considered to favor a candidate with a privileged education. Here is one of the questions:

Questions 5 - 8 refer to the following reading passage.

The emotional abilities children acquire in later life build on those of the earliest years. And these abilities are the essential foundation for all learning. Successful learning is not predicted by how many facts a person knows or the ability to read so much as by emotional and social measures: being self-assured and interested; knowing what kind of behavior is expected and how to rein in the impulse to behave poorly; being able to wait, to follow directions, and to turn to others for help; and expressing needs while getting along with others.
A child's emotional abilities depend on the most basic of all knowledge, how to learn. There are seven key ingredients of this crucial capacity - all related to emotional intelligence:
Confidence. A sense of control and mastery of one's body, behavior, and world; the child's sense that he is more likely than not to succeed at what he undertakes, and that adults will be helpful.
Curiosity. The sense that finding out about things is positive and leads to pleasure.
Intentionality. The wish and capacity to have an impact, and to act upon that with persistence. This is related to a sense of competence, of being effective.
Self-control. The ability to modulate and control one's own actions in age-appropriate ways; a sense of inner control.
Relatedness. The ability to engage with others based on the sense of being understood by and understanding others.
Capacity to Communicate. The wish and ability to verbally exchange ideas, feelings, and concepts with others. This is related to a sense of trust in others and of pleasure in engaging with others, including adults.
Cooperativeness. The ability to balance one's own needs with those of others in group activity.
5. According to this passage, which of the following is
true?

1) The ability to read is not important to a child's successful learning.
2) A child's level of emotional intelligence is highly related to how well she can control her impulses.
3) Emotional intelligence is learned early in life and does not change once adulthood is reached.
4) A child's level of emotional intelligence is independent of the child's ability to learn in school.

Signs of the Times - David RePass Comments on The New Haven Firefighters Test
 
Again, this is as I understand it, and I may be mistaken(though I don't think I am).

The way the law is written, whether the test is race neutral is determined by the result, ie if blacks do not do well on the test, the law says it is not race neutral.

The whole case is stupid. I worry that no one is going to get what they should, and justice is not going to be served. I just am not sure that this is Sotomayer's fault.



They fault is in the way she dismissivley ruled here.

Given her racist anti-white comments, a pattern develops.
 
I have found a site that purports to have actual examples of the types of questions found on the New Haven firefighter test. As you will see, they have no relation to firefighting, but could be considered to favor a candidate with a privileged education. Here is one of the questions:

Questions 5 - 8 refer to the following reading passage.

The emotional abilities children acquire in later life build on those of the earliest years. And these abilities are the essential foundation for all learning. Successful learning is not predicted by how many facts a person knows or the ability to read so much as by emotional and social measures: being self-assured and interested; knowing what kind of behavior is expected and how to rein in the impulse to behave poorly; being able to wait, to follow directions, and to turn to others for help; and expressing needs while getting along with others.
A child's emotional abilities depend on the most basic of all knowledge, how to learn. There are seven key ingredients of this crucial capacity - all related to emotional intelligence:
Confidence. A sense of control and mastery of one's body, behavior, and world; the child's sense that he is more likely than not to succeed at what he undertakes, and that adults will be helpful.
Curiosity. The sense that finding out about things is positive and leads to pleasure.
Intentionality. The wish and capacity to have an impact, and to act upon that with persistence. This is related to a sense of competence, of being effective.
Self-control. The ability to modulate and control one's own actions in age-appropriate ways; a sense of inner control.
Relatedness. The ability to engage with others based on the sense of being understood by and understanding others.
Capacity to Communicate. The wish and ability to verbally exchange ideas, feelings, and concepts with others. This is related to a sense of trust in others and of pleasure in engaging with others, including adults.
Cooperativeness. The ability to balance one's own needs with those of others in group activity.
5. According to this passage, which of the following is
true?

1) The ability to read is not important to a child's successful learning.
2) A child's level of emotional intelligence is highly related to how well she can control her impulses.
3) Emotional intelligence is learned early in life and does not change once adulthood is reached.
4) A child's level of emotional intelligence is independent of the child's ability to learn in school.

Signs of the Times - David RePass Comments on The New Haven Firefighters Test

I call b.s. on two counts. Firstly fire fighters work with children all the f-ing time both on the job via schools and community programs AND via actual firefighting where understanding some child psychology definitely could come in handy. Remember this isn't a standard fire fighting test. It was a test for promotions to higher level positions such as Lieutenant within the dept.

Second, THEY WERE F-ING TOLD WHAT TO STUDY. As in, "study this book, these chapters."
 
Back
Top Bottom